Transcript Slide 1
International Trade and Competition Policy
Presented by:
Dr M. A. Razzaque
Content of the Presentation
International trade and trade liberalisation
Trade liberalisation and competition policy
Is trade liberalisation helpful to competition policy?
Does competition policy restrict international trade?
or, does it promote trade competitiveness?
WTO and competition policy
Competition policy under trading blocs
International trade and trade liberalisation
International trade – Exchange of goods and services amongst
countries
Trade Liberalisation?
Undertaking liberal policies for imports
Having liberal policies for exchange transactions
Trade Policy and Instruments
Policy => sets out objectives and means to attain
them
Instruments => a set of tools through which policy
objectives are to be materialised.
Trade Policy Instruments to Control Imports
Import bans
Quota – quantitative restrictions
Tariffs (customs duty, supplementary duty, VAT, Dev surcharge)
Tariff rate quotas
Foreign Exchange restrictions
Import Licensing
Trade Liberalisation would imply:
• Relaxation/removal of import bans
•Relaxation/removal of quantitative restrictions
• Reduction/removal of tariffs
• Relaxation of foreign exchange restrictions
• Simplifying the import licensing procedure
How trade measures are recorded:
• Use of certain classification system (such as HS and
SITC)
• Use of codes to reflect disaggregation of commodities
Consider the Code:
HS 02
HS 0202
HS 0202200
_ Meat and Edible Meat Offal
_ Meat of Bovine Animal Frozen
_ Meat Bovine Cut w/Bone Frozen
Operative Tariff Schedule
OTS of Bangladesh 2003-04
Excel Sheet showing Bangladesh’s OTS
Calculate the impact of tariffs
87032113
(luxury
vehicle)
$100
CD
22%
SD
250%
DS
4%
AIT
3%
VAT
15%
$122
$305
$317
$327
$375
On-going Trade liberalisation in Bangladesh
Significant changes in terms of abolition of import quotas,
simplification of import licensing procedures, reduction in import
tariffs, harmonisation of tariffs, reduction in the number of tariff
slabs.
Bangladesh: Removal of QRs at the 4-digit HS Classification Level
Year
1985-86
1987-88
1988-89
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1995-97
1997-02
2003-06
Total
478
529
433
239
193
93
109
120
122
63
Restricted for trade reasons
Banned
Restricted
Mixed
275
257
165
93
78
13
7
5
5
5
138
133
89
47
34
12
19
6
6
8
16
79
101
39
25
14
14
16
16
10
Restricted for
non-trade
reasons
49
60
78
60
56
54
69
93
95
40
5.0
2003-2006
1997-2002
1.9%
2.2%
2.2%
1.9%
1994-95
1995-97
3.2%
0.0
1993-94
3.2%
10.0
1992-93
11.1%
15.0
1991-92
14.5%
20.0
1990-91
20.5%
25.0
1989-90
30.0
28.7%
35.0
1988-89
1987-88
1986-87
40.0
38.0%
39.6%
34.7%
45.0
1985-86
per cent
Trade-Related Restrictions as Proportion of Total HS 4digit Import Lines
Bangladesh: Un-weighted Average Duty Rates
License
Fiscal Year
CD
SD
VAT
IDSC
Fee
Total
1991-92
57.23
0.73
14.03
2.22
82.29
1992-93
47.14
1.44
12.17
2.19
69.57
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
35.83
25.95
22.46
21.87
1.67
0.61
0.82
0.97
11.63
10.4
10.58
10.68
-
2.15
1.95
1.98
1.99
56.3
42.43
38.95
38.57
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
21.1
20.52
17.12
1.11
1.49
2.04
10.66
10.63
10.36
2.27
2.26
1.99
1.99
1.99
2
40.61
40.49
36.86
2000-01
2001-02
17.2
17.13
3.22
3.22
10.81
10.83
2.07
2.07
2.08
2.08
39.38
40.15
2002-03
16.5
1.96
10.94
2.92
-
35.51
Are all these liberalisation good for competition?
Certainly, liberalisation tends to promote competition
We can work out the competitive effects from the impact of
tariffs.
CD
SD+DS+AIT
BD price
World $100
30%
50%
$195
World $100
30%
0
$130
Domestic producers have to compete with
international firms
Liberalisation could be an effective means for dealing
with monopoly and oligopolistic market structures.
Liberalisation can ensure ‘love for variety’ and quality
Liberalisation however may not work, if:
Importers form cartel and/or are involved in tacit collusion
Foreign firms can manage to ‘avoid’ competition
Import of goods is restricted due to such factors as foreign
exchange scarcity/import licensing procedure/political unrest
leading to disrupted transportation and communication system,
international crises leading to supply shortfall.
In the first place, liberalisation may not be possible, if:
If there is a strong pressure from the domestic industry groups
(vis-à-vis given the isolation paradox and free rider problem
amongst the consumers)
Political economy of protection – the connection between
domestic producer groups and policy makers.
Infant industry argument (but what if the infants are never
grown up?)
Employment argument (but who does the bear the costs?)
Sugar Price Hike
17011100 (raw
cane sugar)
US price $0.46/Kg
($462/mt:)
CD
30%
SD
30%
DS VAT
4% 15%
1$ =
TK.70
0.59
0.77 0.80 0.93
Tk.65
Alternative
Price: $0.46/Kg
0.59
X
X
X
Tk. 41.3
Alternative
Price: $0.46/Kg
X
X
X
0.53
Tk. 37
Shipment and insurance costs have not been considered here, which would
be around 10 percent
For sugar price:
http://www.sugartech.co.za/sugarprice/index.php
BUT, Note that alternative scenarios might result in loss of
government revenue.
Flexible trade policy will require flexible revenue raising
capacities.
The basic point is: on many occasions one can rely on
international trade to tackle the anti-competitive practices.
Does competition policy restrict international trade?
or, does it promote trade competitiveness?
Evidence for restricting international trade is unknown.
However, strong possibility of raising the competitiveness of
domestic industry and thus expansion of exports.
The strategy of providing some protection to begin with and
then setting industries free may be effective, if the right industries
are selected.
WTO and competition policy
• Still not an agreement under WTO
• First proposed in Singapore 1996 but without
any success
• Many developing countries opposed the idea of
bringing in competition policy in WTO – why?
• Having competition policy is not WTOinconsistent as long as the principle of nondiscrimination is maintained.
• In fact, it may be required to have CP to deal
with unfair practices of international suppliers.
Competition policy under trading blocs
• Consider SAFTA
• Suppose, BD and India are to exchange 0 for 0 tariffs under
SAFTA while the tariffs on rest of the world remains the same.
• Let’s get back to our sugar example
Existing situation CD SD DS
17011100 (raw
30% 30% 4%
cane sugar)
US price: $0.46/Kg 0.59 0.77 0.80
India: 0.40/kg
0 tariff under
bilateral FTA
VAT
15%
0.93
0.46
1$ =
TK.70
Tk.65
Tk. 32
(Tk. 60)
Pro-consumer
10% 0% 0% 15%
tariffs
US Price:$0.46/Kg 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.58 Tk. 40.7
Concluding Observations
• Trade is usually good for competition.
• Loss of revenue can however be a concern.
• Trade and competition can promote
competitiveness of the domestic sectors.
• Trade and competition policy does not rule out
the need for providing protection to local
industry.
• Bangladesh has made some significant
progress on trade liberalisation.
• But, there are further scopes for supporting
consumers.
• Well-thought out and flexible use of trade instruments
can serve the purpose of consumers and domestic
industry.
• Regional trading arrangements will have to be
carefully handled to protect consumers.
• Behaviour of the importers need to be carefully
monitored.
Thank You.